The present invention relates to a trading exchange and, more particularly, to an exchange and method for trading intellectual property (“IP”) rights, including rights in patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade dress, and trade secrets.
The market for IP rights has never been stronger. In 2005, for example, royalties from the licensing of IP rights accounted for more than $100 billion in revenues. Both sellers (or licensors) and buyers (or licensees) of IP rights have had the potential to make substantial gains in recent years because of an increased licensing demand.
Currently, there is no centralized marketplace for carrying out the licensing of IP rights. Rather, an IP owner desiring licensing capital must solicit bids from potential licensees and negotiate a licensing agreement. The transaction is similar to the licensing or sale of any other significant property or asset and may take weeks, months, or even years before any deal closes.
A drawback of the current IP licensing market is that IP owners must actively pursue parties for licensing. This process may be both time consuming and expensive, because IP owners usually are not fully aware of the entire market outside of their competitors and often must dedicate time and money to research the marketplace. Often, IP owners engage in expensive licensing campaigns to determine which parties might benefit from an IP license and then solicit those parties for interest. It is not unusual for licensing campaigns to extend a period of years for identifying and targeting all potential licensees.
Another drawback of the current IP licensing market is determining a value for the IP. After a potential licensee is identified, the IP owner and potential licensee must negotiate a royalty or fixed price for the IP rights. While valuation may be fairly settled in established industries, arriving at a reasonable value for IP related to new or emerging technologies may not be easily accomplished. In any technology, the valuation process may require weeks or even months of negotiating before any licensing agreement is signed. Some valuation methods have expedited this process, such as the methods disclosed by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0200104 to Heming et al. (“the Heming Application”). Yet, the Heming Application does not address valuation for new or emerging technologies or the problems described above with determining the licensing market.
In the current IP licensing market, litigation is the only means of recourse an IP owner may have against infringers or parties refusing to accept or pay for licenses. Because of this, the current IP licensing market often is reactive by focusing primarily on parties that already are infringing certain IP rights. For instance, an IP owner may discover that a competitor is making or using a certain patented device. Should licensing negotiations not prove successful (or not even be an option), the IP owner may have to prevail in a patent infringement lawsuit before the IP owner is rightfully compensated for the infringer's use of the patented device. Patent infringement lawsuits often are extremely expensive, sometimes costing multiple millions of dollars, and resolution is seldom quick. In other words, an IP owner may have to spend millions of dollars and wait several years before prevailing in a patent infringement action and finally realizing any financial gain from the IP.
A couple alternatives to the traditional IP licensing market exist, such as patent pools and patent license exchange companies. Patent pools, for instance, collect IP that typically is related to a standard and license it non-exclusively under common terms. Patent license exchange companies, on the other hand, raise money (sometimes as much as hundreds of millions of dollars) to purchase patents and license or enforce them against infringers. While patent pools and patent license exchange companies tend to expedite the traditional IP licensing process, they often do so at the expense of the value of the IP. For example, a patent pool may not receive the maximum value for each patent among the pool. In order to maintain marketability for the entire pool, certain patents within the pool may be considerably discounted or licensed for far less than the market may provide if the discounted patents were licensed individually.
Convenient marketplaces exist for buying and selling (or trading) other types of property rights and assets, such as stocks and other securities, commodities, futures, and even environmental emissions permits. For example, various exchanges, such as the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”), actively trade stocks and securities. Other exchanges, such as the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (“CME”) actively trade commodities and futures. And while most trading activity today is performed electronically, some exchanges such as the National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations (“NASDAQ”) are entirely traded electronically without utilizing a centralized trading floor. These trading exchanges allow for assets such as stocks and securities to be quickly and easily traded, both upon the initial public offering (“IPO”) and during subsequent day-to-day transactions. As a result, owners of such assets have an immediate market for trading and do not have to spend months seeking out buyers and negotiating prices.
Presently, there is no convenient, centralized marketplace for trading IP rights. Accordingly, there is a need for an IP licensing marketplace and a method of trading IP rights in an expeditious manner that maximizes the value of the IP.